Trump admits he discussed Biden with Ukraine, saying he was worried about corruption.
"The White House is considering releasing a transcript of President Donald Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president, in which Trump pressed the foreign leader to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden’s family."
From an article in HuffPost:
"...But people shouldn’t get too distracted by the transcript. While having that document is important, the administration is still refusing to release the whistleblower complaint that set off these revelations about Trump’s conduct."
"...In general, if Trump is refusing to go along with one request and willing to go along with another, we’re probably not asking for enough. We can’t fully investigate the extent of what happened here without hearing directly from the whistleblower, or at least being able to view his complaint in full. And the House Democrats shouldn’t settle for anything less than that,” said Brian Fallon, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Demand Justice."
"...The whistleblower complaint absolutely has to come out. It’s very clear that Congress not only has a right but has a responsibility to this material,” said Anita Dunn, a senior Biden adviser. "
"...There are indications that the Trump call with Zelensky may be a tipping point for some Democrats who have been reluctant to support impeachment."
And from this article:
"White House aides are not worried about potential impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump because they view House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has advocated for an incremental approach, as emboldening them to defy Congress, The Washington Post reported Sunday."
"The report cited two unnamed White House officials who claimed they were “not worried about defying or mocking [House Judiciary Chairman Jerry] Nadler because Pelosi has made it clear she is not interested in impeachment and the House Democratic Caucus is split about what to do to counter Trump.”
The statement by "White House aides" sounds suspiciously like a defiant "double-dog dare" thrown at Nancy Pelosi, who has indicated that she is closer to advocating impeachment proceedings. What has not changed is the unlikelihood that they would result in Trump being removed from office.
Trump's worries about "corruption" are a case of accusation being a form of confession.
Update: Nancy Pelosi to announce formal impeachment inquiry this afternoon.
I hope someday that this horrid nightmare will cease. Without ending the Republic.
ReplyDeleteI am of the opinion that Trump deserves to be impeached, but I really don't understand what the point would be if the Senate would not convict and remove him, which I don't for a minute believe they would. Impeachment by the House without conviction and removal by the Senate would be worse than no impeachment at all. Pelosi and others reluctant to impeach are being criticized as being "political" by those who seem to believe that impeachment is the "right thing to do" no matter the consequences. But impeachment is political by its very nature. Perhaps this new scandal will change the odds in favor of the Senate having the integrity to oppose Trump, but I see no signs of that happening so far.
ReplyDeleteRepublicans have no reason to impeach Trump. They are getting everything they want from him (in terms of weakening the federal government, rolling back environmental protections, enriching the rich, depressing the poor, etc.). Things might be different if there were an obvious ongoing public outcry, but the public seems curiously silent. Things might be different if the country hadn’t lost most of its local newspapers (thanks to the internet), which were good at shaping public opinion. So like David, I see only a downside to impeachment. It’s not as though showing up Trump to be a scoundrel will surprise anyone; he’s already got that covered. And in the eyes of many people, it will just look like the hated elites are trying to destroy the man of the people. Not a win in sight.
ReplyDeleteI am pretty certain that the White House is underestimating Nancy Pelosi, if it judges that she would never impeach Trump.
ReplyDeleteI assume she is slow-walking impeachment because she knows how to count and she knows how to read polls, and trusts her intuitions.
My personal view is as follows:
* The context of the relationship between the US and Ukraine - they're utterly dependent on our aid and goodwill, and will jump through whatever hoops we ask in order to keep the aid flowing - means that it was improper of Trump to even broach the topic of Biden's son, regardless of what actually was said. There is just no way that that topic can even be casually mentioned without Ukrainian leaders interpreting it as a suggestion to go after Biden's son. 'Will nobody rid me of this troublesome priest?'
* I don't know whether, by itself, broaching the topic of Biden's son is an impeachable offense, but it's serious cause for concern. It could easily be *part* of an impeachment case; and depending on the specifics of the conversation, it could even be the primary charge.
* All that said: I think it's one or two degrees too technical for Americans as a whole to get angry about. It doesn't drive moral outrage on the part of people who otherwise wouldn't be disposed to care.
Clinton sleeping with an intern continues to be the gold standard for impeachment: it's something everyone understood, everyone knew was wrong, and somehow seemed to encapsulate something about his character that people found off-putting. This Ukraine controversy checks off the personal-character box, but it's difficult to see people being genuinely repulsed by it.
While I renounce Trump and all his works ...
ReplyDeleteIsn't anyone else curious about Biden's activities as VP? He's made this out to be a crusade against Ukrainian corruption, to wit, he wanted a specific corrupt official sacked in exchange for foreign aid. The corrupt official was also the one investigating Hunter Biden.
This would not be the first time a politician has used his office to extract a family member from scandal. And it's not the same as asking a foreign government to help you dig diet on an opponent.
But I think the story on Biden needs to be explored and, if it was all above board--or at least not as egregious as whatever Trump did--then that all needs to be clear.
Impeachment? Justin Amash (R-Mich) called impeachment, but he hardly started a groundswell of dissent.
The actions of Biden and his son have undergone scrutiny and no wrongdoing has been uncovered. Biden was not the only person to desire the Ukrainian investigator's ouster. According to the WSJ:
DeleteMr. Shokin had dragged his feet on those investigations, Western diplomats said, and effectively squashed one in London by failing to cooperate with U.K. authorities, who had frozen $23.5 million of Mr. Zlochevsky’s assets. In a speech in 2015, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, called the Ukrainian prosecutor “an obstacle” to anticorruption efforts, and mentioned the U.K. case, which he said led to the escape of illicit assets.
But Ukraine’s government was slow to fire Mr. Shokin, despite warnings from the International Monetary Fund and others that Western aid to the country would be cut off if it didn’t act. Mr. Biden, in one of his trips to Ukraine in 2016, pressured the government, telling them the U.S. would withhold $1 billion in loan guarantees. At an event at the Council on Foreign Relations two years later, Mr. Biden said he told Ukraine officials: “If the prosecutor is not fired you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”
Mr. Shokin denied any misconduct, and said he was fired illegally. In an interview with a Ukrainian news service, he blamed his dismissal on Ukrainian “grant-eaters”—nonprofit groups seeking to curry favor with the West.
Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C., said that Mr. Biden was making the same demands that other lenders to the Ukrainian government were making.
“Everyone in the Western community wanted Shokin sacked,” he said. “The whole G-7, the IMF, the EBRD, everybody was united that Shokin must go, and the spokesman for this was Joe Biden.”
According to the talking heads I have heard on MSNBC, Biden's son was no doubt hired at a hefty salary because he was a Biden, but that kind of thing happens all the time, and there is no law against it. There have never been serious allegations that Biden and his son did anything illegal. And all this is old news. It doesn't require any new investigations.
What David just recited was known by Dunning-Kruger and his risible personal lawyer (taking time out from his third divorce -- does Mrs. Pence know about this? -- to beat the dead horse. There is nothing new about D-K turning the charge against him into a similar charge against his handiest opponent. D-K himself opened his reign by telling the Russian ambassador about Israeli secrets, and then accused James Comey of leaking. And so it goes.
DeleteA while back, Jim Pauwels said something about Trump, calling him "rat-smart". The phrase stuck in my mind, and is applicable here. Yes, the thing about Biden and Shokin is old news. But refreshing it in the media has hurt Biden's political chances. Trump has gambled that he will get away with the stunt he is pulling. Flinging poo to see what sticks is standard Trump playbook. He doesn't mind getting his hands dirty.
DeleteThere will be no Senate trial as long as Moscow Mitch performs the duties of Cerberus at the gates of the Senate.
ReplyDeleteWhen this long soap opera ends, and assuming historians will still be allowed to write history, today's star will be looked upon as a sort of passing freak, a dystopian Nature Boy who passed through the national firmament. But Addison Mitchel McConnell, and the inability of his party to put principle over power and remove him, will take up most of the historians' attention.
To paraphrase Yevgeny Yevtushenko (as I remember it):
Republicans who stand up at meetings and shout
And pour out their words in a shower
Don't care if their power is principled
They care only that it is power.
SPECIAL REQUEST: off-topic. Today my niece's daughter, M, will be in court for the first time to identify (in front of a judge) the person who shot and killed her parents - her one-time boyfriend. Please add her to your prayers - that God will give her strength and courage. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteCatherine Rampell's column in the WaPo today notes that Trump's awfulness isn't the result of his own actions alone. Pretty much everyone is complicit in one way or another.
At least the UK's Supreme Court is willing to do what it can to protect democracy there. I am not confident that ours would if they are tested.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/whos-to-blame-for-the-death-of-american-democracy-all-of-us/2019/09/23/a03ce862-de40-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
Anne, praying for your niece, and all the family.
DeleteI agree that Trump is a result rather than the cause of our present dysfunction.
Anne, that experience of your niece is awful. Prayers being offered.
DeleteHow about this for a scenario: The Trump- Giuliani gambit couldn't convict Biden, father or son, of anything. But it could defeat Biden if he is the Democratic nominee.
ReplyDeleteMost voters are not going into the weeds on the Biden part...they will simply focus on Hunter Biden being given a board chair with good money for no other reason than he's the son of the VP. Business as usual in Chicago, maybe, but....
Trump than tightens the drum beats on Warren (Pocahontas, etc., as I remember it her signing on for native American ancestry was for purposes of some kind of tuition benefit.) Another free-loader, says Trump.
Situation precarious! Pelosi will almost certainly have to go with impeachment proceedings when her flock turns for it. The one possibility is that enough Republicans in the Senate will finally be brought to heel as Trump enablers, and vote to impeach. But then! there's the eviction notice on the White House. Will he go peacefully.
Yes, this is a total nightmare from which we can't awake.
Pretty much how I feel (nightmare part). I don't see any Democrat in the running beating Trump. But I would pay cash money to see Corey Booker thrash him in a fist fight.
DeleteI have friends who have dreamed up several wishful scenarios for Trump's demise, mostly figurative (perp walk in an orange jumpsuit without makeup and hair spray), but some literal. Proof of nothing but how coarsened and polarized we all are. Raber refuses to listen to me point out the existence of any "good Republicans."
Republicans apparently feel Trump is an evil they can sanction in order to correct course to the right. Plus, think of the messes he would leave a Democratic electee!
I am one of those voters who was not in the weeds in the Biden story. Thanks to David N. above for the info.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWarren got NO benefit from noting her Indian heritage on faculty information forms AFTER she graduated and AFTER she was hired:
Deletehttps://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/dec/01/facts-behind-elizabeth-warren-and-her-native-ameri/
Back in the (few) days when I hired people, I hired two women separately who had Cherokee blood. The information came up later in a by-the-way fashion. Neither got any advantage in being hired. Both believed it because the story was generations-old in their families.
As it apparently is in Warren's. And she so answered, in a by-the-way fashion, on a questionnaire that asked if she had any minority heritage. (Spoiler: Go back far enough, and we all do.) Only some unstable boob who believed, or pretended to believe, Obama was born in Kenya would gnaw on that fact.
But there is an unstable boob, and so she got a DNA test, which showed a minuscule possibility of Indian blood. Indians, btw, are not interested in blood; they are interested in tribal membership. So she has spent a couple of years apologizing for what dozens of Americans think, from old family tradition, they have.
When I was younger, you could not get any member of my father's large family -- short of subpoenaing him or her under oath -- to deny that my grandfather was the 9th (making me the 11th) Earl of Sandringham. No Indian blood there; when the Blackburns make up a doozie, they go big. Sandringham is one of the queen's castles.
If it were not for the racist rantings of an unstable boob, the Warren story would never have gotten as far as the DNA test, and no one would be the worse off. But now there are people who think there must be something on that nothingburger. There is: one fat ham.
My Aunt Rose's husband hailed from Nebraska or thereabouts. He ran away from home in the 1920's when he was 14. He thought he was part Cherokee. Saw his granddaughter's ethnic layout on Ancestry. Not a drop. They all think they're part Cherokee. So what? I might think Trump is part orangutan from his looks but orangutans seem too nice.
DeleteYeah, we have one of those family legends, too. My sister's DNA test proved about 4 drops of native blood. Didn't figure I needed to spend money on 23 and Me, since we should be the same, right?
DeleteTom, I don't know if you've ever read any of Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series (probably not, chick lit). A fictional Earl of Sandringham met with a very bad and well-deserved end.
DeleteFie! Unmasked and disposed of shamefully!!
DeleteKatherine, I'm sure you can join the Four Drop Club as well. Must be cool to have American ancestry that pre-dates the Mayflower Snobs.
DeleteThis Ross Douthat sentence captures, "Biden is a crook too," scenario...
ReplyDelete"Trump has always sold himself as the candidate of a more honest form of graft — presenting his open cynicism as preferable to carefully legal self-dealing, exquisitely laundered self-enrichment, the spirit of “hey, it’s totally normal for the vice president’s son to get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by the Ukrainians or the Chinese so long as every disclosure form gets filled out and his dad doesn’t talk to him about the business.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/24/opinion/impeach-trump.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
I can't believe that anyone takes Douthat seriously (though, yes, I know they do). He is like the goody-goody salutatorian in high school--more interested in composing the class prayer and doing what Mommy and Daddy say than in thinking for himself or offering an unorthodox idea. How did this nit get to be a spokesperson for thoughtful, conservative Christians?
DeleteUgh. And now I am being hateful and have to go say some prayers. All his fault!
"How did this nit get to be a spokesperson for thoughtful, conservative Christians?"
DeleteHmm? How about he's the NYTimes's idea of a tolerable thoughtful, conservative Christian?
What young Douthat missed, though, is that there is a long history of public personages with a reputation like Caesar's wife being put on boards or committees to lend credence to fallen companies' efforts to reform. Andy Young did one of those gigs, I believe, and so did George Mitchell. In New Jersey it used to be "get Judge Arthur Lane," and when I came to Florida it was, "we gotta get Phil Lewis." Every state has someone who can give credibility and stature to some undertaking that has lost it. Even Nixon knew of an Archibald Cox when he needed one. (That one backfired.)
DeleteAbout Pelosi deciding to finally go ahead with the impeachment inquiry, I think Trump halfway expected it to happen. Maybe that is why he has been picking on California relentlessly lately. The stuff is just ridiculous, and most of it takes a swipe at San Francisco. Which of course is Nancy P's territory.
ReplyDeleteIn the meantime, the President of the United States said this in front of the UN.
ReplyDelete"Joe Biden and his son are corrupt, all right? But the fake news doesn't want to report it because they're Democrats. If that ever happened — if a Republican ever did what Joe Biden did, if a Republican ever said what Joe Biden said, they'd be getting the electric chair by right now. Look at the double standards. You people ought to be ashamed of yourself. . . . You're crooked as hell."
The guy is unbelievable. How can anyone listen to his b.s.?
Delete